Moderator: Community Team
rhp 1 wrote:dumb....
back to the drawing board... though I think it's adorable people actually care about points...
nietzsche wrote:rhp 1 wrote:dumb....
back to the drawing board... though I think it's adorable people actually care about points...
Hey asshole, you have me foed why you keep reading my posts?
Go back to your clan of teens, they actually buy your attempt of alpha male imitation, I'm not impressed at all.
I apologized 2 times for making marpesia make fun of you that day, as I said many times it was not my intention, how the f*ck would I have known you were a puppy using big words. So if you didn't accept my apology there's nothing else I can do, so I suggest you keep me foed and don't interact with me at all.
Now that marp is banned I really don't fucking care about being nice to you, grow up, nobody with self respect buys your bullshit.
rhp 1 wrote:nietzsche wrote:rhp 1 wrote:dumb....
back to the drawing board... though I think it's adorable people actually care about points...
Hey asshole, you have me foed why you keep reading my posts?
Go back to your clan of teens, they actually buy your attempt of alpha male imitation, I'm not impressed at all.
I apologized 2 times for making marpesia make fun of you that day, as I said many times it was not my intention, how the f*ck would I have known you were a puppy using big words. So if you didn't accept my apology there's nothing else I can do, so I suggest you keep me foed and don't interact with me at all.
Now that marp is banned I really don't fucking care about being nice to you, grow up, nobody with self respect buys your bullshit.
LOL... you're so adorable (trying to) make this personal... your suggestion was lame in my opinion, get over it... if you think somehow it was a personal attack, that's your problem.... as far as the rest of your rhetoric? old news, and news I didn't really care about to begin with, your humor just isn't funny, sorry about that... and having you on foe doesn't mean I don't enjoy reading your posts... as a matter of fact, I like that I can have you foed and still click to see what you wrote...
and "clan of teens"? ahh... ok? and I'm sure you realize that "impressing" you is not on any agenda I have... take care... save the hostility for someone that might react to it in a way that would would satisfy you... if you don't like me, that's totally fine by me, I couldn't care less, but because I don't agree with a suggestion you make doesn't mean I'm attacking you... ego much? if you come up with something that makes sense, I'll be the first one in line to say "nice job"... I don't take on-line gaming site suggestions to heart...
Metsfanmax wrote:Locking this topic for a little while so you two can cool down.

Stephan Wayne wrote:Every day is Fool's Day on CC.
spiesr wrote:MERGED: Ability to limit joining players by score
Is your suggestion substantially different than the one in this thread? Suggestions Forum policy is that all discussion of the same idea should be in the same thread.ViperOverLord wrote:I'm not happy about having the idea merged with 'rank segregation.' (But, I reckon I'll get over it.) I had concise and cogent points that I would have preferred to have discussed with my OP starting point.
It was rejected by direct admin veto for years, until the new ownership indicated that they would be willing to potentially reconsider it.ViperOverLord wrote:Furthermore, this thread is 60 pages long (and that's without a sticky). You'd think at some point CC would implement what the players are pressing for. This is done on other gaming sites and to the the satisfaction of the general population.
Stephan Wayne wrote:Every day is Fool's Day on CC.

ViperOverLord wrote:spiesr wrote:MERGED: Ability to limit joining players by score
I'm not happy about having the idea merged with 'rank segregation.' (But, I reckon I'll get over it.) I had concise and cogent points that I would have preferred to have discussed with my OP starting point.
Furthermore, this thread is 60 pages long (and that's without a sticky). You'd think at some point CC would implement what the players are pressing for. This is done on other gaming sites and to the the satisfaction of the general population.
spiesr wrote:Is your suggestion substantially different than the one in this thread? Suggestions Forum policy is that all discussion of the same idea should be in the same thread.ViperOverLord wrote:I'm not happy about having the idea merged with 'rank segregation.' (But, I reckon I'll get over it.) I had concise and cogent points that I would have preferred to have discussed with my OP starting point.It was rejected by direct admin veto for years, until the new ownership indicated that they would be willing to potentially reconsider it.ViperOverLord wrote:Furthermore, this thread is 60 pages long (and that's without a sticky). You'd think at some point CC would implement what the players are pressing for. This is done on other gaming sites and to the the satisfaction of the general population.
agentcom wrote:
You know what, VOL? I think that may be my bad. I think I changed the topic title to that a very long time ago because the word is just about spot on for descriptive purposes. But I do see the pejorativeness of the term as well. Perhaps the title should be set back to something like "Allow users to restrict games by points" or (I'm sure) something better than that.
As for the suggestion, I think I've drunk the CC Kool Aid on this one. I think I've posted in favor of this idea before, but I like the tradition of generally discouraging these sorts of limitations. I've got a decent rank now, but I got here by playing much better players pretty much from the start. For the same reasons that I dislike playing lower ranks now, I loved to play higher ranks when I first joined. In addition to meaning more points for me, I also got to play skilled opponents and sort of learn the "right way" to play.
ViperOverLord wrote:NameOmitted wrote:ya medal hunting? wanted to join your poly game arms race
Yea, you're not a foe. Frankly, you might be the salt of the earth.I was point hunting though and I agree that captain isn't that low. But, I don't like handicapping the 10 points or whatever it comes out to against an equal opponent. This is why I keep telling CC to allow point minimums.
ViperOverLord wrote:NameOmitted wrote:dude look at my range and current score. at the bottom of my range, i'd cost you 2 points over 20? at the top you'd cost me a lot
if you wanna play the numbers that close, fine.
I haven't looked lately at the differentials. I know I was in the 2200s and you were in the 1800s last time and it was 24 point hit, and I probably would have gotten what 16 or 18 for a win? That means I have to win 6 of 10 and more like 7 of 10 to really be worth it? Just so you know, this is why I tend to not play more than 200-300 points up on a player. Sometimes, I take some liberties Major to Colonel though. Cos a Colonel playing a public game is just asking for whatever comes his way. But, Major is the middle space. And that's why when I'm captain or less, I go for 300 or less differential, like I said. You have indicated that you don't care about such things. If you don't care, then how am I not going to foe you?